Home Contact Philosophy Study Certification FAQ banner


















































































The Study

Following are the results of a survey to obtain clinical results of clients listing Anxiety, Phobias, Depression, and Panic Attacks as presenting problem.

84 clients from 1982 through 1987 who listed Anxiety, Phobia, Panic Attack, or Depression as a presenting problem were surveyed. Each client was sent a questionnaire. Of the 84 questionnaires sent, 49 were returned.

The goal of the survey was to obtain feedback on:
1. The staff and the facilities.
2. Communication, professional environment, and promptness.
3. The image conveyed to the client by the clinician.
4. The effectiveness of the facilities approach to the technique used with clients listing anxiety, panic attack, phobia, or Depression on their intake forms as a presenting problem.
5. Credibility with clients (referral source for new clients).
6. Reasonableness of fees.
7. Value of home practice cassettes.
8. Convenience of location.

In looking through the literature, techniques for conducting a survey were described. Several issues were important to consider in the collection of the data:

To ensure the information was given freely, that the information was as accurate as possible, and that the highest percentage of surveys would be returned. To accomplish the highest percentage are returned, questionnaires were sent with:

1. A cover letter, exhibit number one.
2. A crisp one dollar bill as a token of appreciation for taking the time to complete the questionnaire.
3. Questionnaire, exhibit #2
4. A self-addressed return postage-paid envelope.

To ensure freedom to express negative feedback as well as positive feedback and to also avoid obtaining false information, i.e., some inventing anger via extraordinary false claims the following was done:

The questionnaires left the name and address anonymous, e.g., they could fill it in or leave it blank.

To maximize returns, the questionnaire was again sent each person failed to return the questionnaire within 45 days. This again was repeated 60 days later.

Raw Data for the following categories:

1. Phobias (exhibit #3)

2. Anxiety/Panic Attacks (exhibit #4)

3. Anxiety (exhibit #5)

4. Anxiety/Depression (exhibit #6)

Various questions were asked concerning the facility, the ease of making appointments, history of symptoms and value a treatment, the effectiveness of treatment, value of home practice cassette tapes, and so on. The participants were asked to rate each item on a scale of 1- to - 7. A score of 1 would indicate high quality and strong acceptance whereas a score of 7 would indicate low-quality and low acceptance.

Questions A, B, C, E, and F had to do with the staff courteousness, promptness, ease of making or changing appointments, and professional environment. The average for all four groups ranged from 1.1- to - 2.7 indicating that the support staff and facility were found as very good.

Question D had to do with the image they clinician conveyed to the client. The average for all four groups ranged from 1.3 to1.7 indicating that the clinician was found to be very knowledgeable and conveyed a sense of confidence.

Questions G, H, and I were concerned with the effectiveness of treatment. The client was considered as having gained value from the treatment if the average score for questions a G, H, and I were 3.5 or less. The results are tabulated below with other pertinent information.

  Phobias Anxiety Anxiety/Panic Anxiety/Depression
Total number of
10 12 15 8
% gained value 90 50 80 50
Average # sessions
per client
5.2 4.7 8.3 10.7
Longest # sessions
for a client
16 16 30 25
Average Age 39.7 34 37.4 39

Question K had to do with fees which ranged from $50/Hour in 1982 to $75/Hour in 1987. The Average for All Four Groups Ranged from 2.5 - to - 3.2.

Question L asked about the value of home training cassette tapes. The average for all four groups ranged from 2.4 - to - 2.8. Essentially from the individual stores, 71% of those who answered this question found the tapes useful and beneficial.

Question M had to do with a central location of the facility. The average for the groups ranged from 1.8 - to - 2.7.

Of the 84 questionnaires sent, 32 were returned within 45 days, 11 were returned after the first reminder, and six were returned after the third reminder. Three were returned by the post office as undeliverable because of forwarding time had expired. This represents a 60% return rate of 81 questionnaires that were actually delivered by the post office.

In regards to anonymity, of those returning the questionnaire, there seem to be no correlation as to why some would identify themselves and others would not. One client returned the dollar along with a note that he could never accept it as he felt indebted to us.

60% of those surveyed returned the questionnaire. Unfortunately, we have been unable to locate results of other surveys to compare this number with others. However, it was found that most studies of this nature do not survey participants who drop out of the study or treatment protocol before the fourth week. They are considered as having gained no value simply because most protocols require four or more sessions for reconditioning behavior. For all groups in this survey the first four sessions were included in the results. In fact many had reported significant value from as little as one or two sessions.

The survey indicates that the clients had been highly pleased with our support staff and found that it was easy to make and change appointments. The staff was found to be courteous, prompt, and the atmosphere professional.

The results indicate that the clinician was knowledgeable and conveyed confidence. This, for the most part, was also true for those who reported little or no improvement from the training.

The fees (ranging from $50/session to $75/session during this time), were generally found to be acceptable.

Home training cassette programs were found to be useful by 71% of the clients. Generally those who found them to be a less value were those who reported gaining little or no value from the sessions. Generally this occurs when a client has a preconceived idea as to how the treatment is supposed to work and is totally disappointed when his preconceived ideas are way off base to the point where he does not actively engage in the process.

Location of the facility was found to be very good.

For Phobia and Anxiety/Panic Attack groups, an average of 85% gained value as opposed to the Anxiety and Anxiety/Depression groups which reported only 47% having gained value. Discussion: I feel this is because the Phobia and Anxiety/Panic Attack groups have very clear distinct clear cut symptoms as opposed to the Anxiety and Anxiety/Depression groups who symptoms are far less pronounced and no so clear cut. It appeared that the more chronic the anxiety and panic symptoms, the better the results.